How does “A Doll’s House” portray the struggle to be
understood?
The essence of any literary work is the struggle that its characters undergo over the course of the work.
The conflict, whether internal or external, helps to bring into sharp relief the shortcomings of society as
well as their impact on its individuals. Henrik Ibsen in his seminal and ground-breaking work, ‘A Doll’s
House’ has portrayed the failures of his contemporary society that refused to acknowledge women’s
autonomy or individuality. In the play, Nora – the protagonist – experiences a series of events that lead to
her questioning her role in her relationship and eventually breaking free from her marriage in favour of
individuality and independence. This analysis will examine the themes of rigid gender roles, individuality
versus societal expectations, and differing individual reactions to societal oppression as evidenced by the
epiphany, diction, and foil in the play.
1. Gender Divide
Henrik Ibsen portrays the prevailing gender divide in society through Nora’s struggle to assert herself in
the face of a society that refuses to acknowledge her value as a human being. Towards the play’s end, Nora
confronts Torvald telling him, “I was your little skylark, your doll, which you would in future treat with
doubly gentle care, because it was so brittle and fragile.” Throughout the monologue, Nora compares
herself to a doll. In using the doll as a metaphor, she realizes her role as a woman in a man's society is
ornamental, something cute to look at like a doll-child. Further, a doll is meant to be used by its user,
alluding to how women are expected to be controlled by the men in their lives in terms of tastes, interests,
and what they do with their lives. Moreover, the semantic field of fragility created in Nora’s description of
a doll as "brittle and fragile," sheds light on the prevalent perception of women in society as soft, weak and
unable to take care of themselves, which forces them into a position of dependence and necessitates that
men like Torvald need to protect and take care of women like Nora. Nora’s cathartic realization of this
prevalent patriarchal gender dynamic is accompanied with a strong determination to subvert from it,
indicated by her use of the past tense in ‘I was your little skylark’ accompanied with the future tense in that
he ‘would’ treat her with care. This highlights Nora’s broken belief in the institution of marriage and
Torvald’s assigned role as her caretaker and her resolution to break free from the restrictive gender roles.
This is further explored in her statement, “I have been performing tricks for you, Torvald. That’s how I’ve
survived. You and Papa have done me a great wrong. It’s because of you I’ve made nothing of my life.”
As evident from her declaration, Nora has reached self-realization in a fit of existential fervor. The
rhetorical comparison between caring for Torvald and performing tricks indicates her recognition of the
fact that much of her life has been a ‘performance’ and that she has ‘played a role’ as a doting daughter
and wife for her father and husband. The fact that her entire existence is validated by society only through
her connection with a man shows that she – as a woman – exists only for the satisfaction of men’s needs
and not for herself. Moreover, her description of her struggle as one for survival hints at its criticality,
indicating that the only way for a woman to live in this patriarchal society is through a pretentious
relationship with a man she doesn’t truly love. Thus, the culmination of Nora’s arc resulting in the
epiphany highlighting her insignificance in a patriarchal society serves as a mirror for countless other
women who find themselves in the same situation.
2. Individuality versus Societal Expectations
The conflict between Individuality and societal expectations is underscored through the dilemmas that each
character faces in attempting to balance their individual desires with societal constraints. This is evident
through Torvald’s dialogue, “Just like a woman! Seriously though, Nora, you know what I think about
these things. No debts! Never borrow!” Torvald’s scathing and didactic tone while talking to Nora, as well
as his hasty generalization of all women as financially incapable through the phrase ‘just like a woman’
shows that he subscribed to the societal stereotype that women are incapable of handling their own
finances and he thus uses this stereotype to control Nora’s life alluding to how society as a whole try to
control women under the guise of stereotype that they cannot be trusted with their own individuality,
unless it is connected to a man. The euphemism in Torvald referring to financial matters as ‘these things’
shows that he feels inappropriate talking it in front of Nora – highlighting that a topic as important as
finance was considered a taboo for women by society just because some men felt uncouth in women
talking about it. The connection thus established to the play’s historical context of restrictive women’s
rights and oppressive societal conventions in Victorian society compels the reader to rethink and
reconsider the role of these convections by shedding light on the irony of women being expected to
maintain appearances and their household but at the same time being denied the right to handle their own
money. This conflict between individual and society is further brought out through Miss Linde’s
justification for marrying a rich man whom she didn’t love: “my mother was alive then, and was bedridden
and helpless, and I had to provide for my two younger brothers; so, I did not think I was justified in
refusing his offer.” Linde’s ability to fulfil her individual motivation of caring for her brothers and mother
is constrained by the prevalent societal norms for women that restrict opportunities for her to earn money.
In this dilemma, she chooses to sacrifice her own individuality for her family’s happiness. ‘Justified’
relates to judgement and morality; Miss Linde felt that it was almost morally wrong to reject the offer laid
by her late husband because it was the only option left to her in a society that entirely constraints her
choices. The irony in Miss Linde’s use of morality to justify her relationship as opposed to love highlights
her desperation and compels us to sympathize with the difficult choice she had to make and indignant that
societal norms forced her to make it.
3. Contrasting perspectives / mindsets of Idealism & Realism / Self-deception
The foil between Miss Linde and Nora exhibits the contrasting perspectives of idealism and realism as well
as how they operate in a patriarchal society. This is exhibited by the contrast between Nora’s dialogue, “It
will be splendid to have heaps of money and not need to have any anxiety, won’t it?” and Miss Linde’s
response, “Yes, anyhow I think it would be delightful to have what one needs.” The word ‘need’ operates
as a pun, showcasing the sharp contrast between Nora and Linde’s mindset. Nora’s myopic worldview is
exhibited through the irony of her equation of the tangible (money) and the intangible (anxiety). Her
transactional approach to life leads her to believe that more money will eventually lead to less problems.
She is oblivious to the superficiality of her relationship with Torvald which leads her to focus more on the
material aspect of her life rather than the emotional. On the other hand, Miss Linde’s perspective of ‘need’
– one based on sheer necessity reflects her realistic perspective of wealth and happiness. Her unhappiness
in her marriage with a rich man led her to realize not to correlate wealth with health or happiness. Another
instance of Nora’s self-deception is in her response to Miss Linde challenging her worldview, “Many years
from now, when I’ve lost my looks a little. Don’t laugh. I mean, of course, a time will come when Torvald
is not as devoted to me, not quite so happy when I dance for him, and dress for him, and play with him.”
The certainty that Nora attaches to the future through the use of declaratives like ‘will’ indicate her
awareness of the fragility of her self-worth and its superficial foundation. The asyndeton in listing the
various ‘acts’ she does for Torvald connote that she is putting up a façade of a happy marriage – lying to
both herself and the world about how she feels in her marriage. Nora serves as an example for how
minorities operating in an oppressive society have to operate under a certain level of self-delusion, else
they risk being crushed by the reality they live in.
In conclusion, the depiction of the skewed gender dynamic through Nora’s relationship with Torvald, the
conflict between individuality and societal expectations through Nora and Miss Linde’s individual
struggles as well as their differing mindsets in their common struggle serve together to highlight the
various pressures and dilemmas a woman faces in an oppressive society, compelling the audience to
reconsider and revalue the contribution and role of a woman in moulding a fruitful relationship, household,
and society. The realism incorporated in the play through the complex, fully-developed characters and
relatable situations amplified its message, resonated with the audience, and served as a powerful call-toaction for equality, inclusivity and individuality.